I prefer the semi-autos for several reasons, but the main one is "Trigger".
A clean, crisp 4 to 4.5 lb. single-action trigger is my preference, always, when hits count.

I have several revolvers, and I enjoy shooting them, at the range, or plinking at the deer lease,
but when I NEED to make a shot count, I would rather have a well-tuned semi-auto. So that's what I carry everyday.

Sure, you're not going to get 15+1 of 9mm in a package that's less than an inch thick, but between the examples the OP listed, the semi still holds 20% more ammo than the revolver.

It depends on whether you're a "glass half full" or "glass half empty" kind of guy. You can look at the "pocket nines" and complain that you've given up ammo capacity compared to a larger 9mm, or you can be happy that compared to the revolver, you've got *more* rounds available, and they're a more powerful cartridge.

I just prefer semis over revolvers. It's a preference thing for me. I can carry 6 +1 in my subcompact 9mm and still carry it in my IWB and concealed with no issue.
When carrying my singlestacked, I always have an extra mag on me to able to reload quickly should the need arise.
Size-wise, carrying a singlestacked works well for a lot of ladies more figure hugging fashions, especially when you carry on body all the time. (and I always keep my gun within easy reach, not down on my ankle, thigh or such).

Which brings me back around to doublestacked semis (not what you asked about I know but still easy enough to conceal carry even being a compact vs subcompact).
SA XDM 9mm 3.8". I have a 13 rd mag for it, which if I carry it, I usually don't carry an extra mag then.
Glock 19, g4. Have 15 rd mag for it. Usually don't carry extra mag.

For me, and probably like most others here that are trained and comfortable with their various guns, it's about having the choice and flexibility to be able to carry the gun that works best for the given occasion.

The smith 642 is the best easiest pocket gun to draw from a pair of jeans that I own. There is no beter example of a quick grocery trip type firearm that will do its job in a pinch. I am good with it because I practiced hard to get that way. It has never had a malfunction of any kind ever period end of story. It is slow to reload for me with speed loaders which I keep with it and throw in a coat pocket. This is even more exagerated because I am a lefty and the lefty reload is moe difficult for me with this gun.

The Beretta Nano is the easist gun to carry that I have ever caried Iwb. It dissapears. It feels like I am carrying nothing. I holds 7 rounds six plus one so that is actually two more rounds before a reload as compared to the 642. I can carry two spare mags with it easier than I can carry 3 speed loaders. It is provng to be reliable with high test sd ammo, and I can reload it much faster.

Honnestly I could not choose between them but If I were going to get one before the other it would be the nano.

I pocket carried a 5 shot revolver for 20 years. For the last 6 its been a semi auto thin 9mm pistol loaded with +P ammo. First was a pf-9 and it work fine, no complanes except in recoli and trigger pull was a bit heavier. For the last few years a kahr 9mm. Now both a cm9 or cw9. I see no need in ever going back to a revolver for CC needs. Now handgun hunting is revolvers field of play.

It's all about preference, like Chevy vs Ford or Honda vs Toyota. Go with what you like and don't worry about what we choose. I'm most confident with revolvers (particularly at the small end of the size spectrum) and my lone 1911. Though I do like my father's Kahr K9, I'm not quite as consistent with it as my 2.5" and 3" K Frames.

As an example, I'm the opposite of Walter (to an extent) in that overall I prefer the double action trigger of my Rugers, Taurus and in particular my S&W revolvers to all other guns. He chooses what works for him, I choose what works for me ... it all works out.

I have a Ruger LC9 and an S&W 642. For pocket carry I like the 642, it's only 3oz lighter than the LC but it seems to make a difference. The LC holds a couple more rounds and is more powerful, it's also easier for me to shoot fast than the 642. The LC may someday replace the 642 as my main carry gun but for now it's the 642.

the small little semi autos dooo feel nice. but when it comes time to operating them, well they are not that useful to me. i cant stand having to fumble around trying to get the magazine out, or those crappy little safeties.

it may be cute to have a microspic gun, but when your hand HITS the the button or lever that deactivates the hammer/trigger mechanims EVERY time you rack the slide it gets OLD.

true you can reload the semi auto faster, but big hands suck with little guns.

but the funniest thing is, i always see a new speed load technique for semi autos every month in the magazines. never a writer mentions the old fbi standard with revolvers.

speed draw loaded revovler, empty it into a man size target at x yards, reload, and empty it again into th etarget in about 40 seconds.

I have never heard of them. The comparison looked interesting and I was all about it until I read the price tag that is more than double my Nano. That thing better shoot around corners, never ever fail, have a lifetime warranty, and come with 300 rounds or so of ammo or maye a free holster.

(Boberg) I have never heard of them. The comparison looked interesting and I was all about it until I read the price tag that is more than double my Nano. That thing better shoot around corners, never ever fail, have a lifetime warranty, and come with 300 rounds or so of ammo or maye a free holster.

I know it's probably not for everyone, and that's OK......my snotty response would be Why trust your life with a gun that came in with the "low bid"?

rembrandt I guess you drive a top end high dollar car cause it better than than low dollar cars???!!!! Now that is lower cost not lower quality. Or would you dare to own a honda cause its probably a smart buy ,gets the job done and runs for a few 100,000 miles with little or no break down .

rembrandt I guess you drive a top end high dollar car cause it better than than low dollar cars???!!!! Now that is lower cost not lower quality. Or would you dare to own a honda cause its probably a smart buy ,gets the job done and runs for a few 100,000 miles with little or no break down .

Just having fun here......so let's compare the analogy to its absurd limits, one could argue a Mercedes while costing more and built with better safety features, protects the occupants lives better than the cheaper Honda. Is that putting ones family in jeopardy with the low bid? Probably, entertaining argument for what it's worth.....but any gun is better than no gun if confronted with bad guys.

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.